On 31.08.20 20:06, Oliver Simmons wrote:
> Does anyone know if this tagging:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ProposedRoofLines
>
> Is accepted and ok to use?
>
> It has “proposed” in the title but there’s none of the usual proposal
> stuff saying if it was accepted or not.
It never went
Does anyone know if this tagging: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ProposedRoofLinesIs accepted and ok to use? It has “proposed” in the title but there’s none of the usual proposal stuff saying if it was accepted or not. I was wanting to use it but thought I would ask first.Thanks :)- Oliver
Ah, yes, in smaller schools or schools in dense areas that might be the
case. It came up here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/38911304
It's rather large; has kindergarten up to high school education; not all
areas are available for students during breaks; areas are designated for
some students
Volker Schmidt :
> The double role issue, if it occurs, is there in either case, separate
> relation or role in the bicycle route relation.
>
If a way or a chain of ways in a route relation has no
forward/backward role, you can assign it a transfer/transport role.Easy
for e.g. ferries operating
It's been a while that I have been to school, but from memory, as well as
from the current situation I see from my kids at their school, the school
grounds are basically the same as the "Pausenhof". E.g. in my school,
pupils had their respective spaces according to age groups or maybe
classes, and
Hi Martin,
I stumbled upon the page when looking for something better than
leisure=playground for the concrete slabs that are used for recess and are
called "speelplaats" ("square for playing") in Dutch. I've added some links
to that page, which made you notice. I hadn't noticed myself that it's
I just discovered someone has added leisure=schoolyard to the wiki. It is not
completely clear to me how to apply this tag, is there a difference between the
school grounds minus the buildings and the schoolyard? Which parts have to be
excluded from a schoolyard? Does it only apply to spaces
The double role issue, if it occurs, is there in either case, separate
relation or role in the bicycle route relation.
Regarding travel details of ferry/rail/bus sections within bicycle routes:
This information, if available, should go on the the ferry/rail/bus route
relations, as these means of
Jo:
> I added that it's not needed for ferries in the proposal on the wiki. It's
> alright if we have more than 1 way to do it and leave it up to the mapper
> to decide whether to map as a single route relation or split them and use a
> superroute relation.
>
Wouldn't this apply to other
I added that it's not needed for ferries in the proposal on the wiki. It's
alright if we have more than 1 way to do it and leave it up to the mapper
to decide whether to map as a single route relation or split them and use a
superroute relation.
If I start doing a bicycle tour, I want to know in
'transport' role, 'transportation' role ... is this in use and
documented somewhere?
In bicycle routes, when the ways are different for the two directions,
forward and backward roles apply to the ways in the relation. If a
transfer/transport/transportation is to be applied as well, how would you
We've been doing it for years for ferries, so in that case I agree that
it's somewhat overkill.
In the case of transferring to a train or bus, I don't think it's overkill
to be explicit about it though. It seems really odd to me to have railway
ways or highway ways with bicycle=no|use_sidepath as
On 31/8/20 8:25 am, Volker Schmidt wrote:
Keep it simple, if the simple solution does not limit you.
Agreed. I see no reason why a way as a member of a simple route relation
could not have the role 'transport'.
___
Tagging mailing list
13 matches
Mail list logo
